IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Comment on rpl-routing-header draft

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Tue, 26 April 2011 13:07 UTC

Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA769E0767 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.864
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.864 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.735, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TisB3xw80eZh for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e38.co.us.ibm.com (e38.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAAFE0715 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.226]) by e38.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p3Q5Axuf029383 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Apr 2011 23:10:59 -0600
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p3QCugi6049908 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:56:42 -0600
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p3QCuf92020537 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:56:42 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-237-220.mts.ibm.com [9.65.237.220]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id p3QCudoB020146 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:56:41 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id p3QCucF4014183; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:56:38 -0400
Message-Id: <201104261256.p3QCucF4014183@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: "Reddy, Joseph" <jreddy@ti.com>
Subject: Re: Comment on rpl-routing-header draft
In-reply-to: <DE92901D19672647B9ADB0CB499498650508B3293A@dlee02.ent.ti.com>
References: <37E3AA7855F5AB4B8220815B379D1ACE064DCF74DB@dlee02.ent.ti.com> <37E3AA7855F5AB4B8220815B379D1ACE064DCF74E5@dlee02.ent.ti.com> <DE92901D19672647B9ADB0CB499498650508B31DB8@dlee02.ent.ti.com> <81F856BA-79E9-464F-9452-80E79B68F671@cisco.com> <DE92901D19672647B9ADB0CB499498650508B3293A@dlee02.ent.ti.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Reddy, Joseph" <jreddy@ti.com> message dated "Mon, 25 Apr 2011 11:53:46 -0500."
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:56:38 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "'ipv6@ietf.org'" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:07:37 -0000

> In the most common usage of this header, the border router inserts a
> source routing header with the full set of intermediate nodes before
> forwarding it towards the destination within the RPL network.

and then.

> Yes, we do not use IP-in-IP tunneling and instead simply insert the RH head=
> er in the packet.

What specification are you following that says do this?

Routing headers (as designed and specified) are inserted by an
originating node (whether the original sender or a tunnel entry
point). If you have a middle node insert this header to an existing
packet, no suprise things are not going to work.

Thomas

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email